This case discussed the attributes which are necessary for considering an
agreement as an arbitration agreement.

It was held that among the attributes which must be present are:
1. The arbitration agreement must contemplate that the decision of the
tribunal will be binding on the parties to the agreement.

2. The jurisdiction of the tribunal to decide the rights of the parties
must derive from their consent, or from an order of the Court or from a
statute, the terms of which make it clear that the process is to be an
arbitration.

3. The agreement must contemplate that substantive rights of the parties
will be determined by the agreed tribunal.

4. The tribunal will determine the rights of the parties in an impartial
and judicial manner with the tribunal being fair and equal to both sides.

5. The agreement of the parties to refer their disputes to the decision of
the tribunal must be intended to be enforceable in law.

6. The agreement must contemplate that the tribunal will make a decision
upon a dispute which is already formulated at the time when a reference is
made to the tribunal.

Other important factors include whether the agreement contemplates that
that tribunal will receive evidence from both sides and give the parties
opportunity to put forth their issues and hear their contentions; whether
the wording of the agreement is consistent with the view that the process
was intended to be an arbitration; and whether the agreement requires the
tribunal to decide the dispute according to law.

The courts have laid emphasis on
(i) existence of disputes as against intention to avoid future disputes;
(ii) the tribunal or forum so chosen is intended to act judicially after
taking into account relevant evidence and submissions made by parties
before it;
(iii) the decision is intended to bind parties;
(iv) nomenclature used by parties need not be conclusive.